3 ms·

It is a bit nice to have a "full" operating system in your container, especially for debugging. There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu

It is a bit nice to have a "full" operating system in your container, especially for debugging. There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu image vs Alpine, aside from the image size.

AnonCoward42 3y ago
Ironically Ubuntu image is worse for debugging than Alpine by default even if it is substantially bigger. `vi` and `less` are missing from Ubuntu for example and are part of Alpine.
- gjvc 3y ago
  So? All you have to do is "docker exec -it container /bin/bash" and run "apt update" and "apt install vim", then remake the image with fixes or re-run the container once you've figured it out.
  - AnonCoward42 3y ago
    You can always smuggle the debugging tools in even `FROM scratch`, but my point was that "by default" these debugging tools were missing on Ubuntu.
- shepherdjerred 3y ago
  The benefit of Ubuntu, at least for me, is that I know it pretty well. Alpine isn't bad, I'm just not familiar with it.
  - tracker1 3y ago
    Try debian-slim, should mostly be the same, but save you 100mb+ off of your final size most of the time.
KronisLV 3y ago
> There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu image vs Alpine, aside from the image size. I switched from using Alpine for my own images to using Ubuntu instead a while ago: https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-for-all-of-my-containers https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-fo... So far, it's surprisingly nice. Ubuntu based images take up more space, but thanks to layer reuse and storage being affordable, this isn't a big issue in practice (at my scale). There are no surprises in regards to performance or package management that I have to deal with. Actually, I can use Ubuntu/Linux Mint locally and have the same install instructions for tools/dependencies as well (if I want to test things outside of containers, running on the system directly). It's also really nice to be able to build my own base image with whatever tools I want available (e.g. nano and some debugging stuff) and have them be available in all of the language/stack-specific images that I build later. The EOL is also pretty long and I don't think that there's any shame in having a "good enough" and somewhat boring distro for most dev stuff, only occasionally looking at PPAs for newer stuff. That said, Alpine and Debian are both fine as well! I still run Bitnami images for most complex software like databases, which I think used Debian as a base: https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers
tracker1 3y ago
Would suggest debian-slim as a base image over Ubuntu. Still deb, and most of the tooling is the same, but smaller base size to start. Also make sure to look into cache and man-file cleanup as part of any apt-get steps.

AnonCoward42 3y ago

Ironically Ubuntu image is worse for debugging than Alpine by default even if it is substantially bigger. `vi` and `less` are missing from Ubuntu for example and are part of Alpine.

gjvc 3y ago
So? All you have to do is "docker exec -it container /bin/bash" and run "apt update" and "apt install vim", then remake the image with fixes or re-run the container once you've figured it out.
- AnonCoward42 3y ago
  You can always smuggle the debugging tools in even `FROM scratch`, but my point was that "by default" these debugging tools were missing on Ubuntu.
shepherdjerred 3y ago
The benefit of Ubuntu, at least for me, is that I know it pretty well. Alpine isn't bad, I'm just not familiar with it.
- tracker1 3y ago
  Try debian-slim, should mostly be the same, but save you 100mb+ off of your final size most of the time.

KronisLV 3y ago

> There doesn't seem to be a _huge_ drawback to running an Ubuntu image vs Alpine, aside from the image size. I switched from using Alpine for my own images to using Ubuntu instead a while ago: https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-for-all-of-my-containers https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/using-ubuntu-as-the-base-fo... So far, it's surprisingly nice. Ubuntu based images take up more space, but thanks to layer reuse and storage being affordable, this isn't a big issue in practice (at my scale). There are no surprises in regards to performance or package management that I have to deal with. Actually, I can use Ubuntu/Linux Mint locally and have the same install instructions for tools/dependencies as well (if I want to test things outside of containers, running on the system directly). It's also really nice to be able to build my own base image with whatever tools I want available (e.g. nano and some debugging stuff) and have them be available in all of the language/stack-specific images that I build later. The EOL is also pretty long and I don't think that there's any shame in having a "good enough" and somewhat boring distro for most dev stuff, only occasionally looking at PPAs for newer stuff. That said, Alpine and Debian are both fine as well! I still run Bitnami images for most complex software like databases, which I think used Debian as a base: https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers

tracker1 3y ago

Would suggest debian-slim as a base image over Ubuntu. Still deb, and most of the tooling is the same, but smaller base size to start. Also make sure to look into cache and man-file cleanup as part of any apt-get steps.